The Obama administration is mobilizing all its political resources to persuade senators to vote on the New START agreement. The latest offer to reluctant Republicans was an extra $4 billion for nuclear modernization. Yet Arizona Sen. Jon Kyl still won’t agree to a vote before January.

As time runs out, the political battle lines are hardening. There is an increasing danger that, whether it wins or loses on this vote, the administration could lose the momentum of its renewed partnership and dialogue with Russia — potentially more critical to U.S. national interests than any one agreement.

Text Size

-

+

reset

OPINION

POLITICO 44

The administration should consider using at least some of the political capital now deployed for New START to shore up the broader accomplishments of the U.S.-Russia reset. This may help senators, as well as the public, understand why the treaty is important for the relationship — and why it matters to U.S. interests.

Washington must reject attempts from both sides to characterize this ratification as part of a quid pro quo for Russian support on Iran, Afghanistan or any other area of cooperation. In particular, comments from senior U.S. and Russian officials that the post-reset partnership hinges on ratification just reinforce an outdated mode of thinking about the relationship that the reset was intended to replace.

Instead, these officials should emphasize that cooperation on shared security challenges is in both countries’ interests — and is likely to continue, even without New START ratification.

The best way to make this point is to focus publicly on the accomplishments of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential Commission. These include joint counterterrorism and counternarcotics operations — like the October raid on a heroin lab in the Afghanistan-Pakistan border region; an anti-hijacking exercise in August; expanded access to Russian airspace and railways to supply the North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in Afghanistan; and active intelligence sharing to deny terrorists funds from hawala financing networks.

One reason some senators have been reluctant to support New START may be their uncertainty about where Russia stands among America’s friends and adversaries. The more they hear Russia and its nuclear arsenal described as a threat, the more they wonder whether a modest bilateral arms control treaty is the best way to protect Americans.

Linking failure to ratify the treaty with warnings that Russia may reverse its cooperation on Iran and Afghanistan — clear U.S. security priorities — only reinforces the impression of Moscow as hostile rival, and not a partner. The best way to reverse this impression, and make New START ratification part of a comprehensive partnership, is to commit to a “reset” of Russian engagement with Congress.

Readers' Comments (4)

Cooperation? At the end of the day, Putin is still Putin. Russians just want to exploit a very weak and feeble US Administration, so they trot out all the predictable buzzwords. Seeing as how Obama has already betrayed Poland and Czechoslovakia, how could anybody blame them? Russian opportunists have much to be excited about. Uber-dupes like Obama only come around once every 30 or 40 years. One must take advantage of the opportunity.

Putin looked into the eyes of the GOP and saw it's 'very dumb nature'. Actually, it's more greedy and reckless than dumb. For dumb they rely on their constituents, like the many who will undoubtedly post here defending the act of not ratifying START.

The Iranian government and Al Qaeda will be happy to know they have like minded friends in the GOP.

START STOP START STOP. this con game has been going on for decades and nothing gets better. We don't trust the Russkies and they don't trust us for good reasons. The only solution is to make a Nuke Free World and that needs to be done fast or we won't last as a civilization.